-
IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.
Talking Politics
- Thread starter Legends of 2017
- Start date
antman said:
It was a joke. Its pretty obvious the quote was out of context. It was also a comment on the futility of selectively quoting back at people in a debate thats gone on. There is zero bad blood on my part.
Have you got a response to my last post that Baloo quoted?
tigersnake said:
Oh, my last was a general response, not specifically to your response to BBear.... sorry 'bout that.
On your other post, you are correct that when Gillard did the deal with the Greens and Independents in 2010, they did only agree to support the government on supply/confidence. Other specific legislation had to be negotiated piece by piece. I can't be bothered looking for counter examples (if there are any) so on that one you win
rosy3 said:
her you go rosy. Smart.
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2016/jul/08/cathy-mcgowan-offers-to-support-coalition-after-meeting-with-malcolm-turnbull
this is the key bit: But she also said her discussion about supply and confidence was with Turnbull only, so if circumstances changed her position might also change.
nice line about 'I'm never in opposition, I don't oppose things' so sensible. Like she just approves everything, right?
she ousted Mirabella, what's not to like?
Message from Cathy.
I appreciate how important it is for this current situation to be resolved. The country wants stable and settled government to enable everyone to get on with their lives and business.
As an independent I stand by my principle of no deals. A deal is when you agree to do something in exchange for something.
I will maintain my independence and I am totally committed to the following:
I am not in opposition
I will continue to work with the government of the day to achieve what’s needed for my electorate and the nation
I will consider each piece of legislation on its merits and vote according to my conscience, my electorate and the needs of the nation
Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull and I agreed that while maintaining my complete independence, I am prepared to contribute to the stability of the 45th Parliament by continuing with my past practice of supporting the Government of the day on supply and matters of confidence.
I appreciate how important it is for this current situation to be resolved. The country wants stable and settled government to enable everyone to get on with their lives and business.
As an independent I stand by my principle of no deals. A deal is when you agree to do something in exchange for something.
I will maintain my independence and I am totally committed to the following:
I am not in opposition
I will continue to work with the government of the day to achieve what’s needed for my electorate and the nation
I will consider each piece of legislation on its merits and vote according to my conscience, my electorate and the needs of the nation
Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull and I agreed that while maintaining my complete independence, I am prepared to contribute to the stability of the 45th Parliament by continuing with my past practice of supporting the Government of the day on supply and matters of confidence.
rosy3 said:
Sorry rosy. For government to run it needs money. That money flows from treasury via legislation through parliament. You never hear about it because it's super boring, the bills are never amended, , but they are what keeps the country running.
B
Bill James
Guest
All the data was there on AEC website for this year and 2013 for postal, absentee and prepoll. Cant believe someone in commentary land couldn't do the math on Tuesday.tigersnake said:
Chelsea said:
where is the evidence of this?
Chelsea said:
it is always under threat under a LNP govt. yes they know it would be political suicide to dump it completely, but they will continue to tamper with it... and if they ever got a majority in both houses, i'm sure they would bring back something like the co-payment (at a minimum).
Chelsea said:
I saw a newspaper article on Facebook last week that quoted a govt minister talking about this back in February (I'll post the article if I can locate it). yes I may be clutching at straws a little bit, but its certainly not something Shorten "just made up."
IanG said:
well I don't generally like labor, but I am left wing. however, I do think Daniel Andrews is brilliant. i'm a big fan.
Ian4 said:
No clutching at straws Ian. Its a very self-evident hardwood log. Anyone who doesn't think so or can't see it is either deluded or has good private health care and doesn't want a cent of their taxes going to subsidise others who don't. Coalition cuts, introduced charges for previously free or mostly free services, the attempted GP charge, the investigation of privatizing the billing, all sitting there for all to see. Its death by 1000 cuts. Actually it would be more like 50 cuts. They know they can't come out and say 'we'll privatize medicare', but they know they can, and have, lop off a service here, a procedure there.
tigersnake said:
See, it's posts like these that kill all debate. Nothing was self evident. The ALP made up a scare campaign based on nothing that was alluded to during the election. If that's the way campaigns are going to be run then in the future where you can make up stuff and because it sounds believable people buy and you justify it, then we're quickly heading to a situation we'll be trying to choose between aussie versions of clinton and trump.
Baloo said:
Not made up. And the debate should be killed. Its all on the public record, service cuts, GP charges, plans to privatize billing, and more. I heard Plibresek list all the official, on the record cuts to services and attempted cuts that were withdrawn due to electoral backlash, it was a long one. She wasn't making it up, everything on the list was in the budget, in policy documents or official statements. Some people don't want to see it for reasons already stated.
Why is this even controversial? The Libs will cut medicare every chance they get. Privatise in one fell swoop, no, but the end result will be the same. A bare bones US-style medicare.
BTW, making stuff up? The Abbotts BIG NEW Tax? Axe the Tax? Will go down in history as the dumbest, most fiscally and environmentally irresponsible political campaign in history. Based on what? A lie.
Where was it listed in this elections manifest ? To just pull stuff from the past and claim it's going to happen again is disingenuous. If both sides start campaigning like that we're all screwed.
In case you hadn't realised, Abbott wasn't the LNP Party leader this time around.
I tell you what, sitting here gathering splinters on my arse it's easy to see how the looneys on boths sides are so alike it's not funny despite the fact they think they are the total opposite of each other.
In case you hadn't realised, Abbott wasn't the LNP Party leader this time around.
I tell you what, sitting here gathering splinters on my arse it's easy to see how the looneys on boths sides are so alike it's not funny despite the fact they think they are the total opposite of each other.
Baloo said:
Are you for real? Pulling stuff up from the past, recent past, is standard politics and valid. Its shows form, and policy intent and philosophy. The Libs did it a bit (MT pulled the pin on it) with a CT/ ETS, and fiscal irresponsibility with the GFC stimulous package. (I'm not bagging them for that in those instances, just making the point that it is standard practice).
On Abbott and the CT, I was just making the point that even if the Medicare campaign was a scare campaign, (it wasn't), the Libs are the masters of it.
Nothing loony about it baloo. Actions provide a window to intent and philosophy, its basic policy analysis.